Strong Atheism and what it REALLY means to be an atheist

[Relayer]

Well, in rationalizing the jump from Pure Agnostic to Weak Atheist I would say that the probability of god's existence/non existence is dependent on the logical things we know about our universe (whatever those things may be) Am I right in thinking this way? For example, (lets imagine we haven't seen or heard of a black swan yet) the probability of a black swan was extremely low because we have never seen one or heard of one, therefore it is rational to assume that swans were ONLY white..right? So basically I'm saying that based on our current knowledge, it is rational to make the jump from Pure Agnostic to Weak Atheist..and if its rational to do that then it is irrational to actually be a Pure Agnostic, due to our current knowledge.

What do you think about this?

I think you hold to rather too many assumptions. For one, you assume that God's existence is a matter of probability. On Christian theism, God is a necessary being, which means that either the Christian God must exist or cannot exist. Two, you assume that "we" (all humans?) have not experienced God or have awareness of any arguments in favour of God's existence. Three, you assume the principle that "If something hasn't been observed, then it probably doesn't exist." Try telling that to the guys at CERN. Four, the big one, that the laws of logic and universal epistemic principles that you wish to apply exist, and that there is a plausible atheistic account of their existence.